One of the clearest foreign-policy themes of Donald Trump’s second administration is his renewed focus on the Western Hemisphere. The shift is most visible in the massive U.S. naval deployment in the Caribbean-the largest show of American naval power there since the Cold War-aimed at pressuring Venezuela’s government.
This strategic tilt has prompted analysts to label Trump’s approach the “Donroe Doctrine,” a play on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which warned European powers against interference in the Americas. But does Trump’s strategy really amount to a coherent doctrine?
A Quick Look Back: Monroe, Roosevelt and Washington’s Long Shadow in the Americas
The original Monroe Doctrine of 1823 divided the world into two spheres: Europe was to keep its hands off the Western Hemisphere, while the U.S. positioned itself as the protector of the same region.
In 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt expanded this with the Roosevelt Corollary, which stated that the U.S. had not only the right but the duty to act as an “international police power” in cases of wrongdoing or instability. This justified American interventions in Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic.
It resurfaced during the Cold War, when Washington supported coups, funded anti-communist groups, and even invaded Guatemala, Chile, Cuba, Grenada, and other countries.
But by the early 2000s, the doctrine seemed to fade. In 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the Monroe Doctrine is “over,” describing an era of equal partnership with Latin American countries.
That declaration did not age well.
Trump dusts off the old playbook
During Trump’s first term, National Security Adviser John Bolton proudly proclaimed that the Monroe Doctrine was “alive and well.” In his second term, the sentiment has only been ramped up.
He has expended significant political energy trying to wind down conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, partly to free up military and diplomatic bandwidth for the Western Hemisphere. His team views China primarily as a trade competitor, not a military threat, and his relaxed stance on Taiwan supports that idea.
But in the Americas, however, Trump has been far more assertive — at times confrontational.
Rewarding Friends, Punishing Enemies
Trump has shown favoritism to those leaders ideologically aligned with him:
In return, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele received a major political endorsement, a $5 million incarceration deal, and U.S. help in extraditing top gang members.
Argentina’s Javier Milei secured a $20 billion financial lifeline, timed just before key midterm elections.
But left-wing governments have faced harsher treatment:
Brazil received 50% tariffs amid the political tensions involving former president Bolsonaro.
Meanwhile, in Colombia, U.S. aid was halted and sanctions were imposed on President Gustavo Petro over purported links to narcotics trafficking.
Even close neighbors Mexico and Canada, America’s largest trade partners, have struggled with Trump’s tariff threats and aggressive rhetoric.
Venezuela: the most drastic example
Trump’s confrontation with Venezuela sits at the heart of what analysts call the Donroe Doctrine.
A $50 million reward is being offered for the capture of President Nicolás Maduro.
The U.S. has designated Maduro as the head of a foreign terrorist organization, which could provide a legal justification for military action.
Now a huge U.S. naval force operates in the Caribbean, striking what Washington calls drug-trafficking vessels off Venezuela, in a move critics say raises regional tensions.
These steps mark the most forceful U.S. posture in South America in decades.
Immigration, Drugs and China: The Stated Justifications
The Trump Administration has framed its Western Hemisphere strategy around:
Reducing immigration
Curtailing drug flows
Countering Chinese influence, particularly in countries like Panama.
Protecting the U.S. economic interests by imposing tariffs and coercive diplomacy
For Trump, the Western Hemisphere is the priority theatre where U.S. power must be reasserted.
Is the ‘Donroe Doctrine’ a Real Doctrine?
Trump frequently speaks of threats “from within” and describes migration at the southern border as an “invasion.” His policies reflect this worldview: reshape the Americas, reward allies, isolate opponents, and concentrate U.S. power close to home.
But some analysts argue this is a doctrine only in name, as the policy lacks coherence.
Political scientist Daniel Drezner says Trump’s Western Hemisphere actions are “just a bunch of stuff that happened,” driven by different officials:
Marco Rubio influencing policy on Venezuela
Peter Navarro shaping U.S.–Canada trade tensions
Scott Bessent guides decisions on Argentina.
In other words, there may be no articulated grand strategy-just aggressive moves that collectively resemble one.
Whether Doctrine or Not, the Shift Is Real Leaving aside doctrines, one thing is certain: No administration in Washington has paid such close attention to the Americas in the past three decades. Friends and rivals alike must adjust now to a Washington that views its own hemisphere — not Europe or Asia — as the principal arena of geopolitical competition.
FOR MORE: https://civiclens.in/category/international-news/
About the Author
